Assessment of risk of bias in translational science
- Author(s): Barkhordarian, Andre;
- Pellionisz, Peter;
- Dousti, Mona;
- Lam, Vivian;
- Gleason, Lauren;
- Dousti, Mahsa;
- Moura, Josemar;
- Chiappelli, Francesco
- et al.
Published Web Locationhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1479-5876-11-184
Abstract Risk of bias in translational medicine may take one of three forms: A. a systematic error of methodology as it pertains to measurement or sampling (e.g., selection bias), B. a systematic defect of design that leads to estimates of experimental and control groups, and of effect sizes that substantially deviate from true values (e.g., information bias), and C. a systematic distortion of the analytical process, which results in a misrepresentation of the data with consequential errors of inference (e.g., inferential bias). Risk of bias can seriously adulterate the internal and the external validity of a clinical study, and, unless it is identified and systematically evaluated, can seriously hamper the process of comparative effectiveness and efficacy research and analysis for practice. The Cochrane Group and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality have independently developed instruments for assessing the meta-construct of risk of bias. The present article begins to discuss this dialectic.